(Corrects spelling of Tucson in first, 16th paragraphs of
story published Aug. 5.)

Aug. 5 (Bloomberg) -- A Wal-Mart Stores Inc. worker said he
was disciplined for using Facebook to rail against a boss’s
“tyranny.” A crime reporter in Tucson, Arizona, was fired for
using Twitter to taunt that the city had too few homicides.

The National Labor Relations Board, which acts on unfair-labor practices, has reviewed 129 such cases since 2009
involving social media and the workplace, most filed this year,
according to a study to be released today by the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, the nation’s largest business lobbying group.

The five-member labor board and its general counsel have
sided with employers in some cases, agreeing workers can be
fired for gratuitous “griping” about the boss. In other
circumstances, the government has contended employees were
exercising a right to speak out about workplace conditions. The
NLRB risks creating a right to Twitter-bomb the boss with online
insults, said Michael Eastman, who prepared the study for the
Washington-based Chamber.

“The things people write on social media sites are not the
most restrained,” Eastman, the Chamber’s executive director of
labor-law policy, said in an interview. “Employers are
concerned about where the board may go.”

The board has yet to set a policy on whether workers can
discuss the workplace on social-media sites without reprisal,
Eastman said. Workers disciplined for social-network posts say
their comments are protected under the 1935 National Labor
Relations Act, which lets employees discuss working conditions.

The number of complaints filed increased after the board
said in October that American Medical Response of Connecticut
Inc. wrongly fired an employee for criticizing her supervisor on
Facebook, Eastman said. The agency’s Hartford office said the
comments were protected as part of an online discussion with
fellow workers, and the company’s policy restricting online
comments interfered with workers rights.

‘Overly Broad’

The ambulance company settled in February, agreeing to
revise “overly broad rules,” the agency said.

The Chamber report showed the board has also reviewed
social-media policies at Sears Holdings Corp., the largest U.S.
department-store chain, and complaints posted on Facebook during
union organizing at Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise, which
runs the Foxwoods casino in Connecticut.

“As the use of Facebook and other social media tools
increases, the NLRB has seen an increase in charges filed by
employees in regional offices across the country,” Nancy
Cleeland, an agency spokeswoman, said in an e-mail.

The board has almost completed a report on social-media
charges investigated by the NLRB that “should provide useful
insights” for employers in crafting policies on the subject,
she said.

‘Water Cooler’

“Employees in the old days gathered at the water cooler,”
Marshall Babson, a partner at Seyfarth Shaw LLP in New York and
Washington and a former member of the NLRB, said in an
interview. “Social media is the 21st-century analogue.
Employees use this device to air grievances and solicit opinions
from employees. That’s why it’s protected.”

The NLRB’s taking up social-media cases will help protect
employee rights, Kimberly Freeman Brown, executive director of
American Rights at Work, a union advocacy group based in
Washington, said in an e-mail.

“Workers are already facing a severe imbalance in the
economy, so it’s important that protections for workers who
speak up for fairness on the job keep up with the times,” she
said.

The Chamber’s report listed the case against Wal-Mart, the
world’s largest retailer, in which a worker complained after he
was disciplined for comments about management “tyranny” on his
account with Facebook Inc. The NLRB general counsel’s advice
division sided with Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart and
recommended on July 19 dismissing the case because the comments
were “griping” and not protected by law, the study found. The
case has been closed.

‘Stay Homicidal’

In a case against Lee Enterprises Inc., the police reporter
at the company’s Arizona Daily Star posted complaints on Twitter
Inc.’s site about his newspaper’s headline writers and comments
about crimes, such as, “You stay homicidal, Tucson,” and
“What?!?!?! No overnight homicide?” according to an April 21
memo from the NLRB. He was warned and fired.

The publisher didn’t violate law by firing the employee
because the postings weren’t related to workplace conditions or
seeking to engage co-workers to talk about employment, the
NLRB’s legal advice division said.

Bobbie Jo Buel, executive editor of the Star, declined to
comment on the findings or the firing.

An NLRB office in Memphis, Tennessee, also dismissed a case
on June 30 against a Wal-Mart distribution center in Searcy,
Arkansas, brought by a worker who complained of being demoted
after a Facebook posting, according to the study.

Earthquake Wishes

In references to Midwest earthquakes, the employee said the
building should “collapse while certain members of management
were inside.” The NLRB determined the comments weren’t
protected speech, according to the study.

“We are pleased with the outcome,” Dan Fogleman, a Wal-Mart spokesman, said in an interview.

In another case cited by the Chamber, an employee at
Build.com Inc. said she was fired by the home improvement
retailer based in Chico, California, for commenting on possible
labor-code violations, according to the study. The posting drew
responses from her Facebook followers.

Build.com offered to settle and agreed to tell employees
they wouldn’t be punished for posting comments about “terms and
conditions of employment on their social-media pages,”
according to an April agency statement quoted by the study.

Brandon Proctor, vice president of marketing at Build.com,
declined to comment.

“This is absolutely a growing issue for union and non-union alike,” Harley Shaiken, a professor at the University of
California at Berkeley who specializes in labor issues, said in
an interview.

The Chamber used the federal Freedom of Information Act to
gain copies of all charges, complaints and settlements related
to social media. The documents showed five cases resulting in
settlements, according to the study.